+- PG-HQ Forums (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms)
+-- Forum: Panzer Grenadier (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: PG-HQ Q&A (https://www.pg-hq.com/comms/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: [PG-HQ Dev Blog] 2013 May Update (/showthread.php?tid=543)
Pages:
1
2
RE: [PG-HQ Dev Blog] 2013 May Update - Shad - 05-07-2013
(05-07-2013, 08:49 AM)rerathbun Wrote:(05-06-2013, 03:38 PM)Shad Wrote: In other news, we will very shortly have support for Hammer & Sickle and Edelweiss IV should you seek to play them.
I still like the title Edelweiss - The Book, plus it should put it in the proper order on the Library's Games Page.
What if we changed Edelweiss - Expanded to be Edelweiss III?
Then the relationships are crystal clear.
RE: [PG-HQ Dev Blog] 2013 May Update - rerathbun - 05-07-2013
(05-07-2013, 10:12 AM)Shad Wrote:(05-07-2013, 08:49 AM)rerathbun Wrote:(05-06-2013, 03:38 PM)Shad Wrote: In other news, we will very shortly have support for Hammer & Sickle and Edelweiss IV should you seek to play them.
I still like the title Edelweiss - The Book, plus it should put it in the proper order on the Library's Games Page.
What if we changed Edelweiss - Expanded to be Edelweiss III?
That works for me, anyone else have an opinion?
RE: [PG-HQ Dev Blog] 2013 May Update - Michael Murphy - 05-07-2013
I'm good with Edelweiss III and Edelweiss IV although we might be better served by using numerals instead; (think Edelweiss 3 and Edelwiess 4). My issue here is that with this many iterations, we're running out of four character abbreviations for each version.
RE: [PG-HQ Dev Blog] 2013 May Update - plloyd1010 - 05-07-2013
Shouldn't the new Edelweiss be Edelweiss III? Edelweiss Exp. would be Edelweiss II
RE: [PG-HQ Dev Blog] 2013 May Update - rerathbun - 05-07-2013
(05-07-2013, 12:43 PM)plloyd1010 Wrote: Shouldn't the new Edelweiss be Edelweiss III? Edelweiss Exp. would be Edelweiss II
See note on the 'box back' section of the Edelweiss Expanded page.
RE: [PG-HQ Dev Blog] 2013 May Update - plloyd1010 - 05-07-2013
Based on the 'box back' section, I would vote for Edelweiss - Book. Its predecessor would then remain Edelweiss - Expanded and the 'original' being simple Edelweiss. Otherwise leave out the I, II, III, & IV as they seem a bit muddled.